Google has updated its platform distribution numbers today, showing a nice increase for Android 6.0, but Lollipop is still ticking upward too. As for our Froyo deathwatch, the watch continues as Android 2.2 is holding on at 0.1%.

Android version stats, March 2016

Android version

Previous data (%)

Current data (%)

Change (pp)

2.2

0.1

0.1

0

2.3

2.7

2.6

-0.1

4.0

2.5

2.3

-0.2

4.1

8.8

8.1

-0.7

4.2

11.7

11

-0.7

4.3

3.4

3.2

-0.2

4.4

35.5

34.3

-1.2

5.0

17

16.9

-0.1

5.1

17.1

19.2

+2.1

6.0

1.2

2.3

+1.1

This is by far the largest bump in usage Marshmallow has seen since its release. It almost doubled since last month as several popular phones started getting their 6.0 updates. Android 5.1 continues to grow as budget phones are updated, but 5.0 variants have actually gone down 0.1% this month.

KitKat lost 1.2% this time, the largest of any single version. It does have a lot farther to fall, though. Even now it makes up more than a third of all Android devices. All the older versions of Android are down by less than 1%. Froyo could die any day now, but then we'll have the Gingerbread deathwatch, then the ICS deathwatch, and so on.

If you're an app developer it's nice to officially remove support for a super old version like Froyo. 0.1% doesn't seem like a lot of people, but it's one in every 1000 users, which isn't insignificant when you consider the number of Android users out there.

Marcel Ulbrich

If a developer offers a free and essential service that needs to be available to absolutely everybody, then I honestly wish them all the best in their noble endeavour, however, if a developer is profit-driven, I don't think it's entirely sensible to support froyo (or even gingerbread) these days for a very simple economical reason:
Either, you provide one universal app, which requires adhering to all kinds of restrictions, like going no higher than support library v7, limiting the number of views in any one screen and most importantly staying away from hi-res assets and quality sound files due to the likely low storage capacity;
or you split up your app, which means almost doubling your work just to cater to <3% of the users.
Either way you risk alienating users with high-end devices and new OS versions (read: people with money) in favour of people who don't care or can't afford to spend money on apps anyway, if they couldn't come up with 40$ for a new device in the last five years.

You've really just restated my point. People won't be wanting to support Froyo so if people move away from Froyo then it increases the potential userbase for their app.

Felix

I am an app developer and since the release of Android Lollipop, I didn't support any Android version under 4.0.
And when the Android N Dev Preview is available, the lowest version I support will be Android 4.4.
I will still support ~ 75% of Android users - but you miss a lot of features/functions when you support a lower API level.

What about Android's slogan of being "together" and not the same? I'd rather see some support diversity for people who don't necessarily have the fanciest and latest device. Even if people aren't using those older phones as daily drivers, they may be using them as backups, so it would be nice to have access to (at least relatively) recent versions of those software applications. Instead of hastily updating a program every couple days just for the sake of change, why not do meaningful and thought-out updates over the course of a few months with time for proper testing and implementation for optimal support diversity?

I am not a software developer, but as a software consumer, I can tell you how frustrated I am with the level that software development has devolved to in recent years with the rushed and untested "updates" just for the sake of change that do little more than diminish functionality and make the software uglier and/or harder to use. An attitude of "it doesn't matter; I'll just push out a buggy package and tell people that we'll fix it in the next mandatory update".

Regarding your second comment about $30 phones, I would argue that it is easier to simply not buy a new phone and just keep using one that someone already has. Why turn to artificial obsolescence? Even basic feature phones from 2006 still largely perform their intended purposes well without the latest and greatest in "support".

You're making two distinct points here so I'll address them separately.

"An attitude of "it doesn't matter; I'll just push out a buggy package and tell people that we'll fix it in the next mandatory update"."

You've gotten way off topic here. The quality/frequency of updates has nothing to do with dropping Froyo support, so I have no idea why you're mentioning it.

Froyo was released in 2010 and the latest update for it was in 2011. The decision to no longer support Froyo in 2016 absolutely does NOT constitute a "rushed" decision. As you've said, you're not a software developer so you have to concede that you are unaware of how much the Android landscape has changed over the years and therefore how unfeasible it is to offer support for a 6 year old operating system that only 0.1% of the userbase actually uses.

Add to that the countless security vulnerabilities that have been uncovered and fixed in more recent versions and suddenly keeping Froyo support for an app in 2016 is not just an unexciting prospect but also a potentially dangerous one - not just for your company's reputation if your customer's data is somehow exposed, but for the customer themself. I know this is a MAJOR reason banking apps tend to place limits on how they can be used, for example.

"I would argue that it is easier to simply not buy a new phone and just keep using one that someone already has. Why turn to artificial obsolescence?"

This is intellectually dishonest - you've called it "artificial obsolescence" without having a detailed enough knowledge of the topic to be able to accurately determine whether the obsolescence is indeed artificial or not.

As a software developer I can tell you that in the case of Android apps, the obsolescence you're talking about is absolutely NOT artificial. Every major release of Android introduces new features, performance improvements and security fixes that app developers can (and should) take advantage of.

Basically your entire argument seems to be "I don't understand why these changes are occurring, therefore the reasons must be hostile." I really can't fathom what is leading you to that conclusion.

Finally, whether something is "easier" or not is completely irrelevant to the topic we're discussing. One could argue that it's easier to simply not have a phone at all and therefore avoid these "problems" altogether.

As an aside, I can tell from your attitude to updates that you're not a software developer. App updates actually frequently accomplish far more than is apparent to the end user. They often include security improvements, refactoring, performance improvements etc. Often those improvements are reliant on features only present in newer versions of the Android API, which isn't available for Froyo phones.

First, when you say "The quality/frequency of updates has nothing to do with dropping Froyo support", that's not entirely true. Each new version of a program carries some weight, so if it's just machine-gunning out untested updates for no reason, all while limiting support, then it is relevant (that said, if customers use the ever-annoying Android marketplace to download the program, the Marketplace will automatically recognize the newest version of the program that is compatible, so it's not a huge deal). Just because it's a few years old is no excuse to quit building for it though; some people still use Windows 7, Vista, and even XP (and their parallels in the Linux and OSX world too), and those are all older than Froyo.

As for "countless security vulnerabilities", I'd say that's probably a bit of an overstatement. For Joe Bloe average user with an older phone, it's not a big deal. In the enterprise example that you mentioned, they should try to keep things more current, but there's usually a formal upgrade cycle in that environment.

My point is that Joe Bloe shouldn't be forced to upgrade if he's happy with the device he has. As I mentioned earlier, developers ceasing to release new versions for the platform isn't the end of the world because the ever-annoying (but sometimes helpful) Android Marketplace will just feed Joe the newest version that is compatible with his device, but still.

You may very well say that, and you're welcome to, but you don't have the requisite knowledge to be making these claims. You can't say that's an overstatement as you have already confessed that you are actually not an expert on the topic.

I'm trying to be polite here but you keep just... saying stuff, with no actual domain knowledge or expertise to be able to actually back up what you're saying. It's just pulled out of thin air. For example:

"For Joe Bloe average user with an older phone, it's not a big deal."

How can you make such a statement without knowing in detail what security vulnerabilities they are actually being exposed to? The best example I can think of here is the Heartbleed exploit which I encourage you to research. Whether users knowingly concern themselves with these issues or not it irrelevant, because the fact is when they ARE hit by a security exploit then they will absolutely start to care.

To answer your first question ("You can't just assert this as fact without providing some evidence that
this is actually a real problem that occurs on a regular enough basis as
to be relevant to this conversation."), I would say that it has been an experience of mine, so my evidence would be of the firsthand experience kind, strictly as a consumer.

As for the countless security vulnerabilities not being an overstatement, I would ask you to point to a time that one of these terrible vulnerabilities (heartbleed or otherwise) ever affected a Froyo phone user, because I've never heard of any. Seems to be all hype.

I'll uh..uh.. I'll get that hacker guy, that hacker guy 4chan, and uh.. I'll uh.. Make him connect me to 40 VPNs (that's as many as 4 tens!) and uh.. You know.. I'll uh.. Repeatedly flash the ROM on a new VPN and then uh... You know... You know what I'm just going to code a backend and an interface in Visual Basic to get your IP address, you uh...slanderer. Erer.

dadsad

Marshmallow isn't going to skyrocket until the S6 gets M. That will be a large change.

asdasdasd

A lot of the 5.0 usage is verizon s5 out in the wild too. Once Samsung gets that on 6.0 we will see a huge change.

jerry

Android developers never cease to amaze me - if people using an Android device click on your (article source) link to the Android developers webpage, they will see that the developers can't even program a webpage.

The graphs under Platfom Versions appear no fewer than 3 times, likewise the graphs under Screen Sizes and Densities appear 3 times. Yet using any browser on win7 or win 10, there is no such duplication.

Android developers should hang their head in shame!

MJ

I hate to break this to you but "Android Developers" don't code Google's mobile websites.

ikjadoon

I'm in Win8.1 using Chrome; no issues here?

Corey Watford

Still something to note from the Chart... More people run Gingerbread than Lollipop :0

Randroid

How is 2.6 > 36.1?

Corey Watford

meant Marshmallow, thanks for the heads up

TigerMike901

M at a paltry 2.3% when N is 2 months away from being announced.

efemaco

The sad thing is that would make them even more lazy...

Rod

So, Google should slow down innovation and improvements because of lazy OEMs?

ikjadoon

Nah. Google & app developers need to 1+ year lead time to iron out the bugs they launch with.

Credit should go to Samsung for their timely updates, according to firmware updates on sammobile.com, the GT-I9300 received Android 4.3 on March 3, 2016.

Ben

It's still updating the Galaxy S3?

Pavel Shevchuk

S3 was on 4.3 for months, where did you pull that date from?

jerry

replace "trebelw" with the obvious letters in the link below

treblew.sammobile.com/firmwares/database/GT-I9300/

Pavel Shevchuk

2014-10-01 Baltic 4.3

Defenestratus

How sad is it that Gingerbread still has more users than Marshmellow.

Wonder how much the flops of the 6P and 5X were part of that.

asdadasd

The nexus devices have nothing to do with it and its like this every year. Until the S6/S5 get M you wont see a large increase.

Ben

This is so embarrassingly bad. Google desperately needs to do something about it.

Johnny Depp

this is just HORRIBLE hahaha Google REALLY needs to get a grasp on this before they go any further. Its the only thing Apple does right IMO.

PC_Tool

Dramatic hysterics aside, it ain't that bad. Targeting 4.1+ gets you 95% of users with the current, most up-to-date Google Play APIs.

Johnny Depp

sorry but its bad in my eyes. U cannot give users the most current up to date OS?? when you lease out your OS, it should be in the contract that they update the OS within so many days. Plain and simple.

Matthew Merrick

That's what happens when you open source it.

Johnny Depp

they lease android out....it should be written that its updated within so many days....why is this hard to agree with? haha

Matthew Merrick

No, they do not. Google open sources everything, and says if you build a custom android-based OS that isn't totally incompatible with our proprietary apps, then we'll talk about licencing those proprietary apps to you.

Then, OEMs have to rebuild their proprietary android-based OS every time a new version of the source code comes out. And they very often don't because that's a lot of work for little to no profit. And they have to do it for Every. Single. Device. So only the high end, high markup devices even get considered for the update process for most OEMs.

So no, it has nothing to do with leasing android (because they don't) and everything to do with Google open sourcing it.

Johnny Depp

love learning new stuff, seriously. I did not know it was not intense. I simply thought it was as i was responding with. Its a dumb thing either way.

Matthew Merrick

Oh, I agree it's ridiculous. ChromeOS is a great example of how you can have a still pseudo-open-source OS and still maintain compete control. Google needs to take a page out of their own book and tighten the reigns.

Johnny Depp

thats my overall point, they really need to tighten the reigns! this is why I love my Nexus devices.

Rod

Would that be needed, if OEMs didn't apply skins and sold a single variant of the device, regardless of carriers?

Matthew Merrick

If every manufacturer pulled a Motorola, you're saying? Then the workload to update devices becomes significantly reduced,because you're only making minor changes to the code (drivers and device features, EG Motorola's Moto Display)

But the same general principles still apply.

Rod

What I still DON'T understand, is why Google hasn't made Android's UI based on the launcher.

I mean, what if the launcher would provide the whole UI elements for the system.

Imagine a Samsung device, running a stock Android build (same as Nexus), and the TouchWiz launcher set as default, with the same UI as usual, all provided from the launcher.

Also, it's high time Android OEMs unite and impose a blockade on carriers, demanding that their devices are sold unlocked and untouched, this eliminating the many variants.

I even though, to circumvent this, why doesn't Android recognize the SIM of the device and begin downloading the carrier app pack automatically from Play Store, at first boot?

Those two alone would reduce the workload of OEMs considerably.

Matthew Merrick

I'm not going to get into all the technical aspects, but there are a wide variety of ways Google could improve the situation. And they just don't. And it's fairly infuriating.

ikjadoon

You don't need to go super in-depth, but what are you thinking?

I'm curious. Besides strong-arming carriers with updates (like they did for the security ones) and pushing more of the back-end to Google Play Services, what else is there? Are those even enough?

Matthew Merrick

Well for one, l those different components mentioned are run by different APKs/parts on the OS. You can't just roll them into the launcher without major alterations to the code, and breaking compatibility with everything prior. At that point, it would be WAY more straightforward to just make a systemwide theming engine (which I think would be a fantastic idea)

ikjadoon

Well, one month is a lot shorter than most updates, to be fair. But, it's only to high-end devices, :(

Hmm...a systemwide theming engine sounds awesome as hell. Samsung et al could add their unique features without tying it to a UI.

I'm starting to get pretty tired of Google. Android 7 is coming out and we still can't figure this out?

Matthew Merrick

What Google also needs to do is, after they close-source android, is mimic Xposed, let OEM partners (NOT USERS) make system-level add on packages that don't actually modify the base code and can be independent from the OS. That way you can get things like the moto software suite, without actually affecting the base code. Then all OEMs need to update is their proprietary features, independent of the OS.

Imparus

Unfortunately they both suffer from the same problem, and that is to convince the OEM to actual use it. The power battle is android biggest challenge, and also why even the new samsung devices have forced carriers crapware on them.

Matthew Merrick

How to convince manufacturers to use it: "Android is now closed source. If you want to customize the devices you make as you are accustomed to, there are the tools you have to use to do it"

And then carriers can't screw with it, in the same way they can't screw with Windows or iOS.

Sir_Brizz

...and then we have Android and Tizen and BBOS and FireOS and iOS and etc etc etc etc.

Matthew Merrick

Under this idea, FireOS could not really exist anymore. Tizen? Haha! Windows Phone has more software support. BBOS? Even blackberry knows it's dead.

The only manufacturer you might have leave android is Samsung. But Tizen is not going to crash and burn. If people buy a Galaxy S8 and can't download and install the apps they're used to, that they've paid for? Can't sync progress on whatever game of the week is? They'd lose so much market share it'd be funny. They know this. That's why they haven't already. Samsung threatening Android with Tizen is like North Korea threatening the western world with invasion.

Sir_Brizz

What I mean is people will just take Android where it is right now and leave Google holding the bag. Android is open source and Google can't stop anyone from using it. What people are partnering with them for is a unified platform with Google Play access. As soon as Google's requirements get too stringent, they will just leave. It's not even a question.

So FireOS would still exist. They already don't have Google's blessing.

BBOS would likely just be an Android fork as well.

Samsung could use Tizen or do that as well.

None of these people are tied to Google if they don't have to be. Why do you think Google has been hesitant to add rules to the OHA already? Anything they do add is likely already agreed to by the big players.

Imparus

You can't just suddenly go open source -> close source, the OEM's will just do the same as Amazon, and you will fragment the mobile market so much more. Unless you can be sure the OEM's are willing to use it, you shouldn't do something so crazy that could completely destroy your marketshare.

PC_Tool

"when you lease out your OS"

So...how high are you right now?

Matthew Merrick

Read the content chain down. He legitimately didn't know how it works. No shame in that if you're willing to learn.

PC_Tool

Yeah. I figured he "didn't know"...hence my comment.

I'd argue the "legitimately", though. Looking at the original post it's hard to imagine the user put even a moment of critical thought into his baseless assumptions; and his reaction of what amounts to the forum equivalent of pointing and laughing hysterically at Google (and then telling them what they need to do) certainly does not lend any credence to legitimacy.

Matthew Merrick

I'm a college student, and work at my school as a writing tutor. You would be AMAZED (I continually am) at the short of things your average person (even your average well-educated person) say/think, with no source or basis for where they got the info. It doesn't surprise me that much anymore, I've come to expect it.

PC_Tool

Heh. I get it. I do, really. You've become desensitized.

That's...gotta suck (though I suppose not being constantly frustrated is probably not really a bad trade-off).

I do not envy you that work (but it's good work, so don't take that as a negative at all!). :)

Matthew Merrick

I find it entertaining, to be honest xD. I let other things bother me.

Johnny Depp

I see your point man. I've asked on here before and get rude responses. So I go to assuming and being sarcastic. I love you learn and will ask next time. No sarcasm

Sir_Brizz

They don't lease out their OS, though.

Maybe they should release two distribution numbers: Nexus devices and Everyone else. The Nexus distribution would be more comparable to iOS and would also look a lot better, too.

Johnny Depp

Leasing is the wrong word. But they do Haber to obtain licensees to put Android on their phone. No?

Sir_Brizz

No, they have to get a license to include Google Play and the Google app suite on their devices, though.

ikjadoon

Eh, ask devs. From the few I've heard from, it's definitely harder to code/debug on Android because of firmware fragmentation.

PC_Tool

No need to ask. I can tell ya.

It is by far way more difficult developing using the NDK on the ridiculous amount of different hardware configurations, than it is on say, Apple hardware. But that's the NDK, and highly hardware specific, especially if you want any optimization at all.

,,,akin to developing games on Windows.

The SDK, though? Not anywhere near as difficult. Still more-so than Apple but they've spent so much more effort focusing on the development tools (as have 3rd parties). This has much more to do with experience and a much longer history than anything "fragmentation" related, though.

That said, this chart above isn't really for developers. This chart exists so the Android fans and detractors can get in pissing matches and churn the net for a few days. ;-)

ikjadoon

Right, the NDK's gotta be crazy especially with hardware fragmentation.

But, for the standard SDK, I wonder--isn't that the nitpick? That, Android, which needs compatibility libraries and strong documentation because of fragmentation, actually has less support from Google?

Well, haha, OK, I agree about the pissing matches. But, don't developers just know the platform distribution for their own app's users? But, if you're a "new" Android developer, I'd think this chart would at least give you a baseline.

mark

Nothing crazy about it, and I don't see anything hard about fragmentation with Android development.

ikjadoon

Sure, thanks for your valuable input. As an OS, though, hundreds of devices (with millions of users) are left without critical security updates, Amazon carves out its own app market, and then tablets have their own fragmentation issues.

Again, as in my reply earlier, Android is much better than we had before. But, that doesn't hide the flaws it has today.

mark

Native coding is probably harder, but it's also not required most of the time - I've done native Android development and there's nothing difficult about it, including supporting ARM and Intel.

Supporting lots of devices does make things harder - but consider, what do people really mean when they say the Apple way is easier? Would life really be easier if every make ran a different OS?

So sure, we could say that Apple devices are easier to code for. And Samsung devices are now easier to code for - only have to worry about Samsung on their proprietary OS. And Sony. And HTC. And LG. And Nexuses. They're all easier! But wait a minute - rather than one OS with lots of devices to support, we've _still_ got lots of devices to support, but now with loads of different OSs. Overall things are much harder!

It's Android that allows developers to targets most of the market. It's misleading to say it's harder because of more devices, because without Android, those devices would still exist. It's IOS that is actually making things harder, as its still a separate extra proprietary platform.

ikjadoon

Do you think there are only two options? "Widespread fragmentation must exist OR every OEM has a dedicated OS for their devices"

Nobody is saying they want device-specific operating systems and nobody is saying it's bad that Android organized disparate members of the major mobile players.

All I'm saying is that fragmentation as it exists on Android does make it harder to develop compared to developing for iOS. iOS has other things that make it harder to develop for, too. But, just because Android put all the major OEMs on one OS doesn't mean they did it well in terms of fragmentation.

To me, it's just Google doesn't care that much about OS updates. It'll make a move when Google thinks it needs to.

Sir_Brizz

Google does care or they wouldn't have done things like the Play Services API that encapsulates the majority of up-tree API updates.

I think mark makes a good point that if not Android, then BBOS, Tizen, webOS, iOS, etc. While iOS can occasionally make things easier, it doesn't really help unify the market in any tangible way.

Rod

System APIs are important as well...

PC_Tool

Indeed. But to the extent that they can be avoided (and they are), it becomes less of an issue.

(Admittedly some projects make this harder than others, but it is certainly nowhere near as bad as some would like everyone to believe)

Which is fine if all you want is a large potential audience, but developers and users who want to take advantage of Marshmallow features to improve their apps are left behind. The fact that a major update like this is still only available to < 3% of the users 5 months after release is pretty fucking awful.

PC_Tool

"but developers and users who want to take advantage of Marshmallow features to improve their apps are left behind."

Users...have no apps to improve. (Users who just "want" MM are few and far between - don't let the whining on tech sites fool you - this is a minuscule microcosm that draws those folks; the greater pool of users couldn't care much less. MM just because available for my daughter's M8. Her response: "Eh..." She may bother to run the update one of these days. Maybe.)

I'd love to hear what features you think app developers are wanting to take advantage of, but can't (or won't..since they most certainly can - for their users running MM).

"Users...have no apps to improve." I don't understand what you mean by this. More recent features to the API enable app developers to add new features to their apps that users DO want. Users don't necessarily understand all this - i.e. for the user it's often just "Why can this app do something on your phone that it can't on mine?" but it's nevertheless true.

Your daughter, while I'm sure she's awesome and all, does not constitute a large enough sample size to serve as evidence of anything.

Read the Android API release notes if you want to see detailed lists of the new features that have been added over the years.

PC_Tool

Your first sentence in your original response to me. Users cannot improve apps. That's just devs. If you meant something else, it was worded badly.

"Your daughter, while I'm sure she's awesome and all, does not constitute a large enough sample size to serve as evidence of anything."

She is, but wasn't meant as a sample - just an example; and one that barring any evidence to the contrary, is quite prevalent.

"Read the Android API release notes if you want to see detailed lists of the new features"

Not what I asked. Believe me, I've read them. My question to you was much more specific since you made the claim I though maybe you could expand on it.

Users can absolutely "take advantage of new Marshmallow features to improve their apps" - they do this by installing the latest version provided to them by the app store. Devs "take advantage of new Marshmallow features to improve their apps" by implementing them into their software.

At any rate, there are several logical fallacies in your post that are making it difficult to have a constructive conversation with you on this topic:

"and one that barring any evidence to the contrary, is quite prevalent."

You have the burden of proof here - you've made a claim that the average user doesn't have any interest in using the latest features of their phones. If you're going to make that claim and then use that as a basis for your argument, then you need to back that claim up with evidence. The only evidence you can be said to have provided is that your daughter is uninterested. Okay, great, that's one person. Now you need to find enough people with the same attitude to constitute the majority, otherwise you're arguing from a baseless assumption and we may as well be just saying whatever comes to mind rather than trying to debate honestly.

"Your first sentence in your original response to me. Users cannot improve apps. That's just devs. If you meant something else, it was worded badly."

Sure, maybe I could have worded it better, but this is a non sequitur. Even if you genuinely thought I was trying to claim that users could somehow implement the new features directly into the apps themselves (a bizarre leap of logic that says more about you than me, to be honest) it has no bearing on the argument I was making.

"She is, but wasn't meant as a sample - just an example"

A single example is not useful to this conversation. I could find you a single example of someone who DOES care about the latest features and we're back to square one. You will never get anywhere by citing single examples as backing for your claims.

PC_Tool

"Users can absolutely "take advantage of new Marshmallow features to improve their apps" - they do this by installing the latest version provided to them by the app store."

Users do not develop apps. That statement makes no sense.

"you've made a claim that the average user doesn't have any interest in using the latest features of their phones."

Funny. My anecdote regarding my daughter was in direct response to your claim of the opposite. I suppose we can pass around the "burden of proof" all day long, eh?

"You will never get anywhere by citing single examples as backing for your claims."

Nick, you seem to be stuck on this. If this is really the road you want to take, it comes right back to you and your first response to me and your implication that there were many users and developers who desired to use these features, but could not. Where's your evidence? (You are aware developers can target multiple API's with the Play Store's multiple APK functionality, aren't you?)

Yiannis P

It is not Google's fault that Samsung and the other companies take ages to update their crapwiz softwares. Google devices update just fine.

Johnny Depp

as i said, it should be part of the leasing agreements.

mark

So Google should get it right by making Android only available for Google's Nexus devices, to make the percentages better?

They should only publicly announce a new Android version the day they've pushed it out to all devices just to grab a headline? If company A finishes their OS and announces it, then rolls it out over the next few weeks, I don't see how that's slower than a company that finishes their OS, waits a few weeks, then announces it to pretend they got the updates out quicker - you'd have a point if this allowed IOS to have features earlier than Android, but the opposite is almost always true. My never updated 2005 feature phone got copy/paste faster than IOS.

Google should roll out a special Android version to all devices that's called Android 6, but doesn't have Android 6 features?

They should disallow carrier testing, thus allowing bugs to cause problems with people using other makes of phones on that network? Sorry, after that event, Apple are in no way to claim being better.

On balance, I'm saying no.

Johnny Depp

Um all I'm saying is that I wish Google would tighten the reigns on who does what with Android. Or the timeline they do it in. I see points below that I didn't know... But I still don't think it should be all that hard to find a way to be better at updating phones

"If company A finishes their OS and announces it, then rolls it out over the next few weeks, I don't see how that's slower than a company that finishes their OS, waits a few weeks, then announces it to pretend they got the updates out quicker."

True, except Android Marshmallow has been out for almost half a year now, not "a few weeks".

Martin

This numbers make it so hard to go back to Android from iOS... Really sick of Apple, but couple weeks before Android N and 2.3% for Marshmallow is a JOKE.. Android support is crap (beside Nexus), but I don't like Nexus devices.. Hard decision.

Braulio Cesar Holtz Ribeiro

Weeks? Android N will only be released in about October of that year

Pavel Shevchuk

iOS 9 was released a month before

Prezes Dyrektor

That's what you get for being the same and alone

jerry

is that the same version of iOS that runs on set-top boxes, cameras and televisions - you must bear in mind Android is used for more than just phones and tablets.
Also, many of applications on Android have been decoupled into the Play Store, so for example the webview for apps is updated every 6 weeks for Android along with the Chrome browser as opposed to once a year for iOS. So, not really comparable now is it?

Pavel Shevchuk

Decoupled webview was introduced in Lollipop, and for _months_ after that, chinese domestic market manufacturers continued to manufacture and sell _new_ models running 4.x with no hope of update.

On the native side, support library doesn't cover everything, and QA is still a headache compared to iOS

Rod

I don't recommend a non-Nexus device for anyone coming from iOS.

mark

Another locked down feature phone might be more their thing.

Matthew Merrick

As in incredibly anti-apple person... Shut up. You make us all look bad.

ikjadoon

Agreed. Android users themselves need to shut down these circlejerks.

mark

Why this bizarre obsession to have the latest version? Your device is still supported, and you'll still have new features before Apple finally adds them... Most Android devices don't run stock Android, but instead run the latest version of the Android-based OS that it runs. You might as well complain that even Nexuses don't run the latest version of Linux. Should we moan that Google didn't integrate the latest version of Linux the moment it came out - or even months later?

Apple also lie about versions - they push out an update claiming to be the latest version, but older devices don't get the new features. If you want that functionality, maybe someone can hack Android to display the latest version number, even if you don't have the new features of that version...

ikjadoon

For me, I understand Google needs the 1+ year lead-time to iron out bugs and app developers to get ready.

If they did that, then I'd be like, where the fuck is my update. Without those, it's mostly cosmetic for the user.

Mozukortick

because it's not secure to have outdated software.

Imparus

You are still getting monthly security update on the flagship devices even if they aren't running the latest version of android, and the biggest vector for attack is through the browser, which receive update independent of OS version even the webview does as well.

Mozukortick

i haven't got anything since 5.1.1 and flashed marhsmallow at the end myself, maybe USA or couple of western EU countries are getting special treatment but that's not the case with every country.

Imparus

What flagship phone?

Mozukortick

galaxy s6, normal one.

Imparus

Weird they should be doing monthly security updates for their flagship devices, maybe they are waiting until they have deployed M on them, which is pretty stupid considering how long time it have taken them to do that :-/

Rod

So if you don't have a flagship device, then screw you?

Sir_Brizz

Based on what evidence? Almost every security issue found on Android can't be exploited on devices that can access the Play Store.

Mozukortick

based on tons of articles on google.

Sir_Brizz

Like? There are definitely advantages to being on the latest version of the OS, but that's like saying there are advantages to having the absolute latest model year car.

Rod

Why are there monthly security patches now, then?

Sir_Brizz

Because it's ideal. But the state of an average Android device that only rarely gets updates is not the polar opposite of great security. Pretty much all of the allegedly worst security issues brought up with Android in the past year have no viable attack vector on a Google Play supporting device.

Rod

Everyone likes to have the latest.

If a 2014 Ford Focus is priced the same as a 2016. What would you rather get?